January 5, 2010

Basically, Israeli airline security consists of Larry David-style suspicious staring into everybody's eyeballs (although that never seems to work for Larry, because everyone else on Curb Your Enthusiasm is even stronger willed than he is).

Commenter Cordelia points to this excellent article from the The Star of Toronto:

... "It is mind boggling for us Israelis to look at what happens in North America, because we went through this 50 years ago," said Rafi Sela, the president of AR Challenges, a global transportation security consultancy. He has worked with the RCMP, the U.S. Navy Seals and airports around the world.

"Israelis, unlike Canadians and Americans, don't take s--- from anybody. When the security agency in Israel (the ISA) started to tighten security and we had to wait in line for – not for hours – but 30 or 40 minutes, all hell broke loose here. We said, `We're not going to do this. You're going to find a way that will take care of security without touching the efficiency of the airport.'"

Despite facing dozens of potential threats each day, the security set-up at Israel's largest hub, Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion International Airport, has not been breached since 2002, when a passenger mistakenly carried a handgun onto a flight. How do they manage that?

The first layer of actual security that greets travellers at Ben Gurion is a roadside check. All drivers are stopped and asked two questions: How are you? Where are you coming from?

"Two benign questions. The questions aren't important. The way people act when they answer them is," Sela said.

Once you've parked your car or gotten off your bus, you pass through the second and third security perimeters.

Armed guards outside the terminal observe passengers as they move toward the doors, again looking for odd behaviour. At Ben Gurion's half-dozen entrances, another layer of security is watching. At this point, some travellers will be randomly taken aside, and their person and their luggage run through a magnometer.

"This is to see that you don't have heavy metals on you or something that looks suspicious," said Sela.

You are now in the terminal. As you approach your airline check-in desk, a trained interviewer takes your passport and ticket. They ask a series of questions: Who packed your luggage? Has it left your side?

"The whole time, they are looking into your eyes – which is very embarrassing. But this is one of the ways they figure out if you are suspicious or not. It takes 20, 25 seconds," said Sela.

Lines are staggered. People are not allowed to bunch up into inviting targets for a bomber who has gotten this far. ...

Five security layers down: you now finally arrive at the only one which Ben Gurion airport shares with Pearson – the body and hand-luggage check.

"But here it is done completely, absolutely 180 degrees differently than it is done in North America," Sela said.

"First, it's fast – there's almost no line. That's because they're not looking for liquids, they're not looking at your shoes. They're not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you," said Sela. "Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes ... and that's how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys."

The goal at Ben Gurion is to move fliers from the parking lot to the airport lounge in 25 minutes tops.

And then there's intelligence. In Israel, Sela said, a coordinated intelligence gathering operation produces a constantly evolving series of threat analyses and vulnerability studies.

"There is absolutely no intelligence and threat analysis done in Canada or the United States," Sela said. "Absolutely none."

But even without the intelligence, Sela maintains, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab – who allegedly tried to blow up Northwest Airlines Flight 253 on Christmas Day – would not have gotten past Ben Gurion's behavioural profilers.

So. Eight years after 9/11, why are we still so reactive?

Sela first blames our leaders, and then ourselves.

"You can easily do what we do. You don't have to replace anything. You have to add just a little bit – technology, training," Sela said. "But you have to completely change the way you go about doing airport security. And that is something that the bureaucrats have a problem with. They are very well enclosed in their own concept."

So, airport security in Israel is handled much like immigration in Israel: for the benefit of the majority.

93 comments:

Big Trouble
said...

"So, airport security in Israel is handled much like immigration in Israel: for the benefit of the majority."

Precisely. Besides, the main threat of terrorism didn't come through airports but from the Occupied Territories where Palestinians dreamt of Reconquistaballa. So, how did Israel deal with that problem? It built BIG BIG walls and placed huge numbers of heavily armed soldiers and lots of tanks all along the border, not to mention all the heavy-handedness of Israeli soldiers in West Bank and Gaza. Also, Israel is a semi-democracy, semi-police state. Just about everyone has guns. Not just a dinky pistol but an automatic rifle. And, the Mossad is pretty ruthless.

Yet, the very Jews who support Israel and everything it does as unfortunate-but-NECESSARY do everything in their power to undermine American borders, American security, and the interests of white Americans who have been so good and helpful to the Jews.

this is an example of an article that's mildly interesting but objectively irrelevant. Giving Mr. Sela the benefit of the doubt, when he describes our situation as "mind-bogglinng" he must be referring to the fact that we have 40 million sacred cows known as african-americans, who've succeeded in salting our legal system with judges who consider it their highest calling to invalidate any policy, no matter how rational or effective, that might be viewed as based on color or ethnic origin. If a few whites have to die each year to preserve this definition of sophistication, so be it.

Reminds me of Frank Herbert's Dune novels - the key lies in enhancing human observational skill not in fancy technology (body scanners, electronic noses and the like). Herbert's far future characters underwent special training regimes that allowed them to read people's minds by looking for minute, unconscious facial muscle 'tells'. Of course, Herbert also described the counter-measure - some characters developed extraordinary control over facial and other muscles (the Tleilax Face Dancers) so they could mask their thoughts and intentions and effectively masquerade as other persons.

A few years ago, Bruce Schneier made the same point about body language as the crucial source of intelligence. Nobody listened much.

Of course, one of the reasons why we take "s---" from everybody is that Jewish lefties in the United States have used their considerable political power to make it this way. Israelis don't have to worry about being called "racists" or "Islamophobes" for protecting their country from the nutjobs of the Third World.

Some friends who just came back from Israel also said that they casually make conversation, like, "Are you Jewish? Oh, you are? Did you have a bar mitzvah? Oh, you did? What was your Torah reading...?"

So, if you are not telling the truth, it quickly becomes apparent.

This, I understand, is an aspect of the 287(g) training local police can get for spotting illegal aliens:

I suspect the whole looking into eyes thing is more effective when done by people from tribalistic, low-trust, Middle Eastern societies like Jews and Arabs. They're probably a lot better at interpreting the various subtleties (evil-eye, stink-eye, devil-eye, etc.) of eyes after millenia of tribal/ethnic conflict, competition, and warfare.

"[T]hey're not looking for liquids, they're not looking at your shoes. They're not looking for everything they look for in North America. They just look at you.... Even today with the heightened security in North America, they will check your items to death. But they will never look at you, at how you behave. They will never look into your eyes... and that's how you figure out the bad guys from the good guys."

Of course we don't look at the person. The belief that one person is somehow any different from any other person is the gravest sin in our civic religion.

isreal offered to help the US secure it's physical border with mexico. israeli experts asked US officials what level of security that they wanted. did the americans want to intercept 90%, 99%, or 100% of the border jumpers? the israelis showed what construction and technology would be required for whatever level of interception the americans wanted.

every design included WALLS. which WORK. as proven by the israelis.

the americans politely declined.

when US politicians tell us that "walls don't work", they're lying, or idiots, or both. US politicians are not experts on walls. experts on walls are experts on walls. they know that walls work. the US military knows that walls work, which is why they built walls in iraq.

raytheon, an american company, helps build 600 mile long walls that protect entire national borders in the middle east and asia. but the US government has less than zero interest in hearing anything a raytheon wall engineer has to say. guys like gw bush and barack obama are wall experts too! they already know that "walls don't work!"

Just what we need. A bunch of average-to-low IQ'ers getting all Dale Gribble because they don't like the "minute, unconscious" way we hold our mouths. "That was a 45b Tell you just displayed!" sez Gribble to the tired businessperson who has a hangdog expression. "It's a scientific system, like phrenology!" he says as he has this businessperson hauled away to a full-body-cavity-search detention area.

Spare me.

The Israeli way (even as described - obviously they would never boast about HBD criteria to the Western media) is much better. Looking into the eyes. No charts, indices, or L. Ron Hubbard like systems for fools to get overly obsessed with. Just the eyes.

What that tells me is, the Israelis have a survival instinct - strong will. Can Americans look anybody in the eyes, anymore?

Especially the eyes of NAMs who have funny accents and maybe a fierce scowls?

You would almost have to get KKK'ers or freakin' Nazis if you wanted that done here. Or properly trained military (i.e. those who skipped all the military's sensitivity courses).

Who in the USA has the guts to "not take shit off anyone," and stare down people on a continuous basis? Do we in the USA truly want to live? Or just get by, sneaking away from confrontation at any cost? That's probably the essential question.

Some people are better at confrontation than others are, granted; but how many in the USA ARE indeed comfortable with it? How many - after all the anti-racism, anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism, anti-judgmentalism, anti-aggressiveness, anti-selfishness indoctrination that we Americans are inundated with going forward from our mother's milk to the present day? (A noticeable fraction of which, in school, is sponored and promoted by the ADL and its ilk, ironically enough.)

No, I conclude we can't bring ourselves to look people in the eye and judge them on a non-silly basis. Game over. (Unless we can scare up some old-fashioned meanies, the kind decried on all sides.)

> Some friends who just came back from Israel also said that they casually make conversation, like, "Are you Jewish? Oh, you are? Did you have a bar mitzvah? Oh, you did? What was your Torah reading...?" So, if you are not telling the truth, it quickly becomes apparent. <

This is a technique also used by a substrate of older Appalachian men here in Tennessee. If they use this technique on you (and they are subtle about it), you had better have pat, scripted, easily comprehensible responses on the tip of your tongue, and deliver them instantly and with the greatest conceivable alacrity and without a ghost of a hint of a stutter - or you'll be written off forever as a GD liar. Put these guys in charge of airport security. (Then again, very possibly no one would ever be allowed on a plane...)

Israel is an old-fashioned (i.e. pre-60s) ethno-centric state run on old-fashioned ethno-centric principles. Their very raison d'etre insists that their citizens act accordingly. They are also a frontier society akin to the Old West settlers or the Boers of South Africa. Their enemies are implacable and nearby and inflict death and destruction at every feasible opportunity. They also threaten swift annihilation if and when the wind blows fair for their purpose.

The dispute is also very concrete, even in a literal sense: it is fundamentally about territory, the land of Israel/Palestine itself. This is why the problem is a zero-sum game and insoluble through negotiations except of the Hitler-in-a-railway-carriage kind. In these circumstances "No compromise" is the default position; it is also Plan B.

The fact that American security questions are swallowed up into a post-modernist discourse -human rights minutiae, the Otherness of the Other, doxologies of Freedom, meta-narratives of Oppression, recontextualizations of the Good - is a measure of how remote the issue of actual physical survival is for the US populace. Even the existential shock of 9/11 has faded and the event has become merely a touchstone of partisan zeal in the dreary and fitful ideological battles of contemporary politics. The Cold War itself is rarely referenced except as an item in Ronald Reagan's bio.

America is suffering through a period of febrile serenity. It is the modern political, economic and military Leviathan. Its enemies are ruthless and resourceful enough to kill - though relatively few and infrequently - but not anywhere near sufficiently powerful to kill enough in a sustained manner to constitute anything more in the great scheme of things than a deadly nuisance rather than a mortal threat.

Excluding the military at war, who are in grave danger of death and indifferent to post-modern anxieties as a result, more Americans, I would hazard, have died falling down the stairs or off ladders since 9/11 than at the hands of suicide bombers or indeed in any kind of Jihadist attacks.

There's more to it than that of course, but this is the day-to-day reality of ordinary people's lives: if suicidal Islamic maniacs were all they had to worry about life would be pretty good. No one could say the same about the Russians, British or French in respect of the Nazis seventy years ago. Which situation is the Israeli position more analogous to?

Hence the Israelis efficiently police their airports while Americans police the policing of their airports solemnly dissecting the competing merits of profiling, privacy and panties.

Sure, there are Jewish liberals who are critical of Israel, but all said and done, they are just as pro-Zionist as the rest. Their criticism is just a matter of degree and doesn't address the fundamental injustice of the creation of Israel. When Palestine was divided into two halves, even the part given to Jews had a majority Arab population. Who asked those Arabs if they were willing to suddenly live in a Jewish state? No one. UN, controlled by superpowers US and USSR, rammed it down the throats of the Palestinian people. Naturally, they rose up, which was used as a pretext to drive most of them out from their ancestral lands. Those who say Israel has the right to exist are saying Palestine has NO right to exist. All liberal Jews, whatever their petty criticism of Israel, believe in the 'right' of Israel to exist, thus NO right for Palestine to exist. And, Israelis say any Jew--whose ancestors hadn't lived in the Middle East for centuries or even millennia--can return to 'Israel' but Palestinians who still remember their homes in what had once been Palestine cannot return!!! Jews have a 'right of return' after 2000 yrs but Palestinians don't have it after 60 yrs.

Btw, liberal Jews who pretend to criticize some policies of Israel do so mainly to show off how 'balanced and fair-minded' they are. NPR is a typical example. In truth, despite some sympathetic news about Palestinians, close scrutiny has revealed time and time again that NPR is far more pro-Israel than pro-Palestinian. We may also ask, is evenhanded reporting justified when the Israelis have had such a huge advantage over the Palestinians? Did the liberal Jewish media give us even-handed reporting of South Africa under apartheid? Does liberal Jewish-controlled PBS give us even-handed documentaries on the Civil Rights Movements showing the POVs of both sides? No, liberal Jews say their hearts are always with the underdogs, and so evenhanded coverage or history of something like Apartheid or Southern Segregation would be morally unjustifiable. Then, how come the MOST we can hope for is an even-handed coverage of Israeli-Palestinian issues when Jews have systemically disenfranchised and dispossessed the Palestinian population time and time again? How come for every dead Palestinian, we are shown a dead Israeli... though far far more Palestnians have been killed?

I don't think it would be any problem finding people to do this kind of work. I think it was Steve who pointed out that ex-cops would be perfect for it. They have been trained by years of experience to spot "hinky" behavior.

The quality of airport screeners went up after the job was federalized and pay roughly tripled. You used to see minimum wage workers, now you get a lot of Paul Blart, Mall Cop types.

I can't really remember what they were like before the TSA. I guess I just never paid much attention to them before.

Nowadays, it's impossible with so many of them milling about in their ridiculous blue shirts. Personally, I'm not sure how much "the quality" has gone up. The whole lot of them seem like a bunch of dull-eyed no-hopers. A heady mix of apathetic NAMs and slow Paul Blart types.

What's wrong with "blaming American liberalism on Jewish people"? Jewish people take great pride in taking credit for American liberalism.

Besides, don't liberal Jews blame white Christians for EVERYTHING that's wrong with American past, present, and future? Liberal Jews also blame all the problems around the world mainly on white Christians and conservatives.

A big part of airport security is black folks getting a badge, a gun, and authority to push white folks around. Doesn't have much to do with security, except perhaps to deter people from carrying Brownings in their carry-ons. Revenge for "400 years of black oppression," at gummint expense.

Here's a challenge: Name 3 American Jews who are (1) prominent Zionists; and (2) prominent champions of left-wing idiocy in the US.

I could probably name a couple hundred who are (1) prominent Zionists and closet champions of left-wing idiocy or (2) prominent champions of left-wing idiocy in the and closet Zionists.

More to the point, I can't name 3 who are prominent champions of left-wing idiocy and give Israel its due as world's greatest violator of ostensible left-wing taboos. If all of the "Jewish left-wing idiots" gave Israel her proper due, they'd spend 99% of their time talking about her, and 1% of it talking about everyone else.

It's sort of like the US media's bias for Israel. You're just setting the bar absurdly high.

I flirt with liking the Israelis. No no, it's true! Even when they're bad, they've got this Scarface "I always tell the truth, even when I lie" kinda thing going for them. American Jews, notsomuch. With them I see more of the opposite.

For example, I felt a bit warm and fuzzy hearing Jody's story about Israelis laying out the Powerpoint for a wall on the Mexican border. Very cute/quaint. Sabril's defense? Nah.

"What's wrong with "blaming American liberalism on Jewish people"? Jewish people take great pride in taking credit for American liberalism."

Because it absolves white Gentile elites of any responsibility for the current state of America. It is also a coward's way out -- criticizing another tribe for the faults of your own.

But the main idiocy of the white gentile elites in this country is they suck up to liberal and neocon Jewish power instead of looking out for the interests of their own tribe. Jews are nationalist in Israel because nationalism is good for Jewish power. Jews are globalist in the US because globalism is good for Jewish power--as Jews are a small minority in the US. Jewish principle is "Is it good for the Jews?" Nice principle to have. It's about time white gentiles thought the same way. Indeed, many do but not the white gentile elites who are either too chicken or too brainwashed to stick up for their own kind.

Very true. They only have to worry about academia, Haaretz, the UN, the EU, every Third World Nation, Arab activists, etc. etc.

I'll take hundreds of external enemies over one internal. Hell, thousands, hundreds of thousands, depending on where he's placed.

We're at the point now where it's silly to even make that comparison, between external and internal enemies (We have enemies? We don't even have a "we"!). And I'm supposed to feel sorry for the Israelis and the odds they face? Note that word, "they." At least "they" have a bloody "they."

Unfortunately, most Americans can't look at others in the eye anymore. Doing that would imply that the other person is more interesting than you are, which is impossible in the Baby Boomer narcissism we all live under.

Read music reviews on Amazon, especially of alt or foreign acts. What do reviewers lede with? An earnest graf about "where they were" when they first heard the album. Because that's the most important thing about the album to many an American.

Listen to a foreign guest on an NPR call-in show. What do the callers want to know? They will only ask questions about the guest's country as it relates to America. The fact that most of the questions are attempts to bait the guest into confirming the callers' disdain for America doesn't lessen the narcissism of the question.

"'We know that all al Qaeda members, and certainly all al Qaeda suicide bombers, are Muslims. It is foolish, therefore, to misallocate our resources in the fight against suicide bombers by devoting equal attention to interrogating an 80-year-old Christian woman from Maine and a 22-year-old Muslim man from Saudi Arabia,' Dershowitz said.'

Read the history of the Middle East- far more than half of what was called Palestine was given to the Arabs- Trans-Jordan, for example. The Jews were then thrown out of Arab countries- where were they supposed to go? In essence, what happened was there was an exchange of refugees, with one side-guess which- refusing to accept their own people as refugees, and perpetuating a "crisis" for political purposes. BTW, I'm an American Jew, Pro-Zionist (Because I believe all ethnic groups need a homeland), and I am also against more immigration to the US (Build a wall and throw them and their kids out), and I can't stand Jewish liberals, whom I consider the greatest racial hypocrites of all time.

Read the history of the Middle East- far more than half of what was called Palestine was given to the Arabs- Trans-Jordan, for example.

Look, personally I don't lose sleep over what Jews did to the Palestinians as long as Jews don't rub our faces in our 'historical sins'. Do you see white Americans accusing Jews of having aided and abetted communism's mass murder of millions? No, white Americans respect Jews and want to live in peace. But, white Americans must hear Jews bitch and whine about all the white sins against non-whites. As long as most Jews are anti-white in America and help elect scum like Obama, I cannot support anything Jewish, good or bad. I confess I use the Palestinian issue opportunistically but only because Jews keep using blacks and illegal Hispanics against us for their own global-elitist interests.

"Israelis don't have to worry about being called "racists" or "Islamophobes" for protecting their country from the nutjobs of the Third World."

Very true. They only have to worry about academia, Haaretz, the UN, the EU, every Third World Nation, Arab activists, etc. etc.

Very false. The Israeli government doesn't pay any attention to Haaretz, the UN, the EU, every Third World Nation, Arab activists, etc. etc. Those entities have no influence on Israeli policy whatsoever.

"Very false. The Israeli government doesn't pay any attention to Haaretz, the UN, the EU, every Third World Nation, Arab activists, etc. etc. Those entities have no influence on Israeli policy whatsoever."

So Israel hasn't made any concessions because of outside pressure? None at all?

"It's about time white gentiles thought the same way. Indeed, many do but not the white gentile elites who are either too chicken or too brainwashed to stick up for their own kind."

They aren't chicken or brainwashed. They just don't have a lot in common with your sort and don't see the point in defending the white masses when said white masses thinks they are evil for being elites. Jews have nothing to do with it.

Barbara Ehrenreich is a prominent feminist, Jew, very liberal, and signed a statement wanting a boycott of Isrealis in Academia and the Arts.

So there's a prominent, hard-left Jewish public person who does not like Israel and takes the side of Palestinians. Meanwhile you can take David Mamet (conservative culturally and politically) who both supports Israel and America.

The problem is much more WASP/Anglo elitism, read David Brooks about how intellectuals "lost faith in Americans" because we don't like the elites rejiggering of American society. One writer at NRO wrote that status-anxiety (a good point Steve makes constantly) makes SWPL yuppies prefer "the magical non-White other" in a noble-savage-flat society. Such as "Avatar."

America is a huge nation, 300 million plus strong, widely dispersed, with very many power centers. The idea of a Jewish conspiracy to eradicate America is laughable (not enough Jews and makes most Americans blank machines easily programmed against their own interests).

More likely, "Curb Your Enthusiasm" covering the constant status anxiety means a lot will buy into "end of Whiteness" (from Harold Myerson of the Washington Post). You can't "cheat an honest man" and you cant force a sale on someone unwilling to buy.

On the screeners' IQ thing, here's one anecdote. On my first trip to Israel (pre-9/11) the El Al screener at LAX was an Israeli undergrad mathematics major at UCLA. I know that because I was traveling for a math postdoc, and he started asking me some very informed questions about what kind of math I did. Then he asked me for advice on applying to grad schools and stuff. In my experience, Israeli airport security people at Ben Gurion and (for El Al) at non-Israeli airports are much smarter than the American ones.

On the "check people not cargo" approach, here's an article by Daniel Pipes describing an incident where the El Al screener caught an Irish woman who unknowingly had a bomb in her suitcase. This was after she'd successfully passed through Heathrow security.

So, looking in the eyes is really important, but what if the next guy is trained in Dale Carnegie and makes good eye contact?"

Suicide bombers don't necessarily get a lot of training. And by definition, they don't get a lot of on-the-job experience. Mohammed Atta was probably quite exceptional. There don't seem to be too many more of his caliber.

> far right white Gentile [...]That is why we don't take your Israel criticisms seriously because they are rooted in anti-Semitism. <

There may be some anti-Semitism in observing that "Jews keep using blacks and illegal Hispanics against us for their own global-elitist interests." There is also truth in it. Jews are disproportionately represented in anti-nationalism of every flavor (global-elitist interests); in the USA's "civil rights" (black over white) movement; in black-over-white movements worldwide, from South Africa to Australia; in pro-immigration politics; and in the social and psychiatric deconstruction of "far right white gentile" culture. The rank-and-file are disproportionately sympathetic to this culture of critique. (Norman did have his alleged misgivings (pdf) in '63 - allegedly pushing him close to pariah status - but we don't hear anything more from him about that.)

Is it possible to have an actual intelligent thread about any aspect of Israel without it devolving into The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

Doesn't seem likely in Sailer land.

Given the tremendous differences between Israel and US airports (i.e. only one international airport in Israel, dramatically smaller volumes of passengers, etc.) is it at all feasible to import their screening procedures wholesale? If not, which aspects that are transferable would be most desirable?

Which interests would be opposed to such changes?

No, never mind all that. The Jews invented liberalism and don't want to build a wall because they like Mexican illegal immigrants. That awful Jew, John McCain, is completely against any kind of wall.

"Barbara Ehrenreich is a prominent feminist, Jew, very liberal, and signed a statement wanting a boycott of Isrealis in Academia and the Arts."

She and others like her can carry on this way ONLY BECAUSE they know it will never happen. Knowing that Israel is totally secure under US protection and American support, radical Jews can put on airs about how they oppose the policies of Israel. BUT, if the tide were to turn and if US withdrew its backing of Israel and if Israelis faced the same prospect as whites in South Africa, people like Ehrenrich would be demanding 'SAVE ISRAEL'.

It's kinda like many conservatives actually like the idea of social security but oppose it 'on principle' precisely because they know it will never go away. It's just to grandstand and come across as high-minded, all the while looking forward to picking up the social security checks after they retire.

But this idea that "the Jews" as a group are supporting certain conservative policies in Israel while actively working to undermine those same policies in the US is unsubstantiated.

But it isn't unsubstantiated. You just don't want to hear it. If liberals were really concerned with liberalism, without regard for "is it good for the Jews," they'd spend all their time on Israel and have no time left for running the SPLC, ADL, ACLU, media indoctrination of whites, etc. Israel would have serious problems, and be in a much different position vis-a-vis the west. Alternatively, American Jews could acknowledge the consistent position and drop the psychological war against white American ethnic consciousness, on account of their (at least tacit) support of Jewish and Israeli ethnic consciousness.

And hypocrisy aside, there's obviously an enormous gulf between whites and Jews here; white liberals bash themselves, and Jewish liberals bash...whites! If Jewish liberals were really like white liberals, wouldn't they be spending a lot more time critiquing themselves, and a lot less time critiquing us?

In Toronto, most people doing security are ethnic immigrants. The idea of getting them to profile anyone is a joke. In Israel, everyone doing security is a Jew. If Israelis understood that Canada has no identity left, then they would understand why their style of airport security can't work in Canada or even the US.

isreal offered to help the US secure it's physical border with mexico. israeli experts asked US officials what level of security that they wanted. did the americans want to intercept 90%, 99%, or 100% of the border jumpers? the israelis showed what construction and technology would be required for whatever level of interception the americans wanted.

every design included WALLS. which WORK. as proven by the israelis.

the americans politely declined.

Yeah, I've moved on from the "blame the Jews" mentality too... it's our totally corrupt gentile elites who are the problem. I just can't understand their mentality. They must be evil.

there's a somewhat big difference on average between israeli jews, and ashkenazi jews who are long time citizens of various european nations.

i was only pointing out the fact that israeli experts offered to help US government officials with the mexico problem. these are not the same jewish people who comprise part of liberal leadership of the american democrat party. same name, but fairly different people. many (most?) of the american jews are not even religious. (which, how are they even jews, then, unless it is explicitly about genes?)

i definitely did not mean to give the impression that i do not think a certain segment of american jews are not a huge problem for the US on this issue. they absolutely are.

i have posted many times on this blog that i agree with the argument that there is a certain percentage of the jewish population in every european nation which has a MAJOR problem with european peoples even thinking that they should have an identity, let alone defending such an identity or thinking that they have any group interests.

probably a few of these types were among the american politicians who declined the israeli assistance. but most of the americans turning down the israelis were just christian liberals who do not want their precious, precious mestizos impeded. mexicans are so important for their votes, you see. or their dirt cheap, unskilled labor. most senators and representatives seem convinced that the US cannot function without a steady flow of short fat brown guys who can barely read.

False dilemma. Pointing out Jewish malfeasance doesn't rule out non-Jewish malfeasance. Why pretend otherwise? Also, there's a taboo on criticizing the former, but not the latter, in case anyone's forgotten. You guys get an "A" for effort but I have to fail you on results.

I did accuse American Jewry of hypocrisy, and I spelled out the details. Then you ignored the details and cooked up your own version and acted like it was mine.

I'll consider making a list for you. But, I probably won't bother. It isn't as if the info isn't all over the Web. Why should I do your homework for you? I've been having this same argument for years; it gets old footnoting everything "anew" after a while, and you start using shorthand. Have you read KMac's work? Start there.

Is it possible to have an actual intelligent thread about any aspect of Israel without it devolving into The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?"

Is it possible to discuss the fact that many jewish americans enthusiastically advocate for Israel what they would deny to America (ethnic profiling, border walls, a proper respect for the religious majority, the concept of an ethno-state, the historical reality of a founding people, etc.) without being labeled an agent of the Okrana? If the answer to this question is 'No', then the answer to yours will likely remain 'No'.

Sabril: put your "name three" question to Steinlight, the exception who has spent years ranting against the rule. He can provide a long list of open-borders Jews who want a ring of steel around Israel. So can these rational patriots.

Additionally, not every monster, much less every hypocrite, publicly announces his worst views: the best are too slippery for this, though one may judge them by their fruits. For example, can you name three prominent Nazis who declared pre-Nuremberg that there was a Holocaust? No.

One may, however, observe folks like Abe Foxman and Alan Dershowitz over time and glean (the occasional smoke-screen quotation aside) that they would defend Israel to the death but are not keen on restricting immigration to the United States, especially if it involves profiling based on "race, religion or national origin." For example, here's Foxman's ADL on Israel's security fence. And here's Foxman on American border concerns. Pro-Israeli-fence, and pro-immigration "reform" bill.

Here's Dershowitz on Israel's security fence ("the goal, of course, of my peace proposal is that the security fence will eventually be dismantled when terrorism ends [an event that's surely just around the corner – D.], but before that, it would be on the border, the way the Gaza fence is now on the border"). And here he is on immigration to America ("no Jew should ever be [...] excluded from anywhere"; and see pp. 277-8 in toto).

So there's two. I'll dig through this tonight and see if I can find the name of anyone who also supports strong borders for Israel. The suspense is terrible. Thanks for the challenge.

I read the two pages and I don't see a contradiction. Indeed, he specifically says in the second piece that "reasonable people can disagree about border control and the appropriate parameters for immigration reform"

I also notice from your linked article that Dershowitz favors an independent Palestinian State with Palestinian control of East Jerusalem. In Israel, that's pretty much a left wing position.

I concede that there exist leftists such as Dianne Feinstein who have made general statements in favor of Israel."

Yeah, and Diane Feinstein has done nothing to further left-wing causes.

I also mentioned Emmanuel Cellar - kind of influential. But you ignored him too. You're obviously just treading water, as your original point is indefensible.

Let me ask you this. Is there or is there not an outsized influence in the affairs of this nation exercised by people who self-identify as jewish? I.e. out of proportion to their raw numbers in the population? And if there is, should this be a matter of indifference to the rest of us?

Weak, Sabril. No one with an ounce of common sense is taken in by the notion that Foxman and Dershowitz aren't for opening the borders of America and ensuring proper security for Israel. Let me quote Foxman (as I didn't before; I only linked). Read carefully.

1. ABE FOXMAN, ADL, ON THE IMMIGRATION BILL:

"'The Ku Klux Klan and neo-Nazis were not the only ones who saw an opportunity in the national debate over immigration to sow the seeds of racism as a means to derail immigration reform,' said Mr. Foxman. 'While reasonable people can disagree about border control and the appropriate parameters for immigration reform, the debate has been tainted by the virulent anti-immigrant message [...]'

"several key tactics used by anti-immigrant groups [include]:

" * Describing immigrants as 'third world invaders,' who come to America to destroy our heritage, 'colonize' the country and attack our 'way of life.' This charge is used against Hispanics, Asians and other people of color.

" * Depicting immigrants as criminals, murderers, rapists, terrorists, and a danger to children and families.

" * Propagating conspiracy theories about an alleged secret 'reconquista' plot by Mexican immigrants to create a "greater Mexico" by seizing seven states in the American Southwest that once belonged to Mexico.

"[...] A closer look at the public record reveals that many ostensibly mainstream anti-illegal immigration organizations - including those who testified before Congress or frequently appeared on news programs - promote virulent anti-Hispanic and anti-immigrant rhetoric."

Every bulleted concern above, of course, has a solid basis in reality, as documented on VDare and in many other places.

"'While the European Union's strong affirmation of EU - Israel ties and condemnation of Palestinian terrorism are encouraging, we are greatly concerned by the Declaration's expression of concern about Israel's security fence. [Construction of this fence] is not an effort by Israel to draw up permanent borders.

"'Israel has always sought true peace and reconciliation with the Palestinians. Unfortunately, suicide bombs and terrorism have forced Israel to build this fence. Once this campaign of terrorism ends and progress is made on negotiated reconciliation, the need for the security barrier with be diminished and it will likely be dismantled. [The EU's declaration of concern is a] one-sided approach to this complex security issue [and] undermines the credibility of the EU's involvement.'"

The wheat is that Foxman is properly in favor of territorial integrity and security for Israel, while against it for America. The chaff is the sops about "reasonable people can disagree about border control and the appropriate parameters for immigration reform" (though even mainstream reasonable people use arguments equivalent to those of the KKK...) and "once this campaign of terrorism ends and progress is made on negotiated reconciliation, the need for the security barrier with be diminished and it will likely be dismantled" (once terrorism ends and peace is achieved in the Middle East and pigs fly, it's "likely" the fence will come down - likely - no promises from Abe).

Every ethnic group - every group, period - pursues its own collective interests. Except, it seems, white gentiles.

I have no argument with Foxman et al.'s consistency. Where they're hypocritical is in pretending they aren't pursuing their ethnic collective interests, which include security for themselves and "breaking down barriers" for white America. When they pretend that we're monsters for wanting for ourselves the same sensible things that they want for themselves, it rankles with us; it irritates us; it stinks in our nostrils. It is noticeable. You can play "name three" games and pull every semantic trick in the book, and it remains unavoidably plain. This causes some degree of friction with us.

"Let me ask you this. Is there or is there not an outsized influence in the affairs of this nation exercised by people who self-identify as jewish?"

Yes."

""And if there is, should this be a matter of indifference to the rest of us?""

"It depends what you are concerned about."

I'm concerned about rich influential people (a not inconsiderable demographic among American jews) who seemingly hate my country. MY country as I understand it.

"Anyway, I'm happy to discuss the issue of Jewish liberalism and influence."

No, you are not. Every post you've made here has been an attempt to dissemble.

"Otherwise, please answer my question:

The accusation is that American Jews are supporting efficient, conservative policies in Israel -- such as racial profiling -- while opposing those same policies in the United States."

No?

Simple yes or no question."

Don't get so snippy. You didn't ask that question of me. I answered your "name three" question with a few names, and you ignored my answer. Anyway, the answer to your question is an emphatic yes. Most, if not all, of the jews I've ever met are deeply dedicated to the preservation of Israel, and at the same time are hostile to the idea of immigration restriction.

By the way, if your intent here is to persuade people of your point, you're making an awful job of it - just by the way you attempt it.

"I'm concerned about rich influential people (a not inconsiderable demographic among American jews) who seemingly hate my country. MY country as I understand it."

In that case, I do not believe that disproportionate Jewish influence is too much cause for concern since there are plenty of Gentiles perfectly willing to take on the role of liberal elitist and many do.

"No, you are not. Every post you've made here has been an attempt to dissemble."

That's nonsense.

"Don't get so snippy. You didn't ask that question of me"

Yes I did and you ignored it. Just look a few posts back.

"Most, if not all, of the jews I've ever met are deeply dedicated to the preservation of Israel, and at the same time are hostile to the idea of immigration restriction."

Then it shouldn't be too hard to cite a few prominent American Jews who favor immigration restriction for Israel and are against the same for the US. Just so we are clear, I'm not saying that none exist, but I'm skeptical it's that common and that should be the starting point for substantiating your claim.

Once you've named a few, I bet I can name a few who either oppose Israel as a Jewish state OR support immigration restrictions here in the US.

There was an Interesting parallel made with Frank Herberts's novel: Dune in an earlier comment of this post.

Here is another one:Israel's first prime minister David Ben Gurion (whose name was given to the airport in question) saw the struggle to make the desert bloom as an area where the Jewish people could make a major contribution to humanity as a whole. He set a personal example by choosing to settle in kibbutz Sde Boker at the centre of the Negev and established the National Water Carrier to bring water to the area.In Herbert's Dune, Fremen's most guarded secret is their dream to see the planet transformed into a luxuriant forest where life would be more clement.

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.